On Sun, 15 Mar 2009, Benjamin Schultz wrote: >> Already in R107, although it's pragmatic, not platonic. > > So it is in there. > >> >> Before it was moved there, there was no obligation to initiate an >> Agoran Decision for such elections at all, which I believe it how it >> should be. > > > Any suggestions for improving the matter, so that there is no > positive-duration > election?
Actually, when we have an IADoP, the IADoP CAN just start the election and resolve it instantly (same message), so it's effectively installation by announcement, and no voting period. It's a CAN though, not a SHALL, so a deputy can't do it (R2160a-b), which is why these elections are going on now (because we have no IADoP). I think the R2160 fix I proposed last proposal distribution (which may have passed? I didn't notice against votes) where deputies don't have to wait for a SHALL if an office is vacant, will reasonably do the trick - it could be cleaned up so the election doesn't technically even begin, I suppose, but that might not be worth the bother. -Goethe
